| Abstract: | The right of individuals to leave their country, and conversely their right not to be forced to leave, are generally recognized tenets of international law. In developing countries, 2 patterns of assault on these rights are apparent. 1 pattern concerns political and ethnic pressures associated with the pain and tribulations of nation building in new societies, which tends to produce refugees. The 2nd pattern is an effort to block the brain drain of skilled personnel to more developed countries. The desire to be rid of those who don't fit in and the desire to make those with needed skills fit in explains much of the apparent inconsistency and vacillation of governments on both issues. States with no tradition of statehood often turn to authoritarian models to create cohesion. Where ruling elites attempt to strengthen national unity, they tend to turn on groups whose language ethnicity, religion, culture, political beliefs, or socioeconomic status do not fit in. The 2nd pattern of constraint on Third World emigration is a reaction to the threatened loss of manpower. While Sudan lost only 1% of its labor force to emigration, this included 70% of its medical graduates and such high percentages of high level clerical personnel as to become an obstacle to efficient government. It is not the least developed countries that suffer most from the brain drain; they have less competition for available openings and adjustment to developed country life is more difficult for their citizens. Many "drainees" feel political pressure to leave, although the decisive motivation appears to concern working conditions and employment. the "drained" countries not interested so much in imposing restrictions on themselves as in gaining recongnition of the responsibility of the industrialized nations to developing ones; they want compensation for losses incurred. |
